THE  STATE  UNIVERSITY 

AND 

RELIGIOUS    EDUCATION 

AN  ADDRESS  BY 


DOCTOR  DAVID  KINLEY 

PRESIDENT  OF  THE 
UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


•    AT  THE  DEDICATION  OF  THE 
SOCIAL  CENTER  OF  THE  WESLEY  FOUNDATION 


URBANA,   ILLINOIS 


FEBRUARY  15,  1921 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2012  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign 


http://archive.org/details/stateuniversityrOOkinl 


c 


nl 

THE    STATE    UNIVERSITY   AND    RELIGIOUS    EDUCATION 

^  When  the  federal  constitution  was  framed,  its  writers  omitted  any 

provision  for  a  relationship  between  the  State  and  religion.  They 
took  the  view,  or  appear  to  have  taken  the  view,  that  the  State  as  a 
political  entity  should  not  undertake  to  interfere  in  matters  of  con- 
science. The  various  states,  as  they  have  adopted  their  constitutions 
on  admission  to  the  Union,  have  taken  the  same  attitude.  Some  critics 
of  our  constitution  and  form  of  government  have,  therefore,  said  at 
times  that  the  federal  constitution  and  the  state  constitutions  were 
Godless  and  that  our  governments  were  Godless  governments.  The 
criticism  is  illogical  and  untrue.  It  is  illogical  because  to  say  the  con- 
stitution is  Godless  because  God  is  not  mentioned  in  it  is  to  assume 
the  very  point  to  be  proved,  namely,  that  the  inclusion  of  religious 
provisions  is  a  necessary  part  of  a  political  constitution.  It  is  untrue 
because  the  men  who  made  the  constitution,  the  people  who  lived  and 
live  under  it,  and  those  who  have  had  to  do  with  its  interpretation 
have  been  and  are  God-fearing  and  God-loving  people.  One  might 
as  well  say  that  the  charter  of  an,  industrial  or  commercial  corporation 
is  Godless  because  the  Deity  is  not  mentioned  in  it.  The  omission 
simply  indicates  that,  in  the  opinion  of  those  who  framed  the  charter 
or  the  constitution,  the  organization  in  question  was  not  one  in  which 
religious  provisions  belong. 

The  fathers  of  our  country  showed  their  wisdom  in  departing  as 
they  did  from  the  Old  World  custom  of  mingling  politics  and  religion, 
of  trying  to  coordinate  political  and  religious  life  by  state  action.     Un- 
doubtedly, they  were  led  to  take  the  view  they  did  for  two  reasons. 
One  of  these  was  their  profound  conviction  that  religion  is  a  matter 
of  individual  conduct,  a  responsibility  of  the  individual  conscience;   a 
matter  between  the  individual  and  his  God  and,  perhaps,  between  the 
individual  and  other  individuals  whose  religious  convictions  are  like 
his  own.     Many  bf  the  settlers  of  our  colonies  had  gone  through  bitter 
experiences  in  their  attempt  to  gain  religious   freedom.     They  knew 
what  it  was  to  have  their  religious  beliefs  dictated  to  them  by  political 
authority.     They  knew  what  it  meant  to  have  other  people  give  color 
to  their  beliefs  and  try  to  dictate  limits  to  the  action  of  their  con- 
sciences.    They  had  gone  through   the   bitter  struggle    of    trying    to 
know  God  as  they  saw  him  and  understood  him,  in  the  face  of  at- 
tempts of  political  authorities  to  make  them  see  and  understand  God 
as  others  would  have  them.     The  so-called  omission  of  God  from  the 
constitution  was,  therefore,  nothing  more  nor  less  than  a  recognition 
of  the  right  of  every  individual  to  freedom   of  religious  opinion     It 
was  virtually  a  negative  declaration  that  under  that  constitution  no 
citizen  could  ever  be  coerced  in  matters  of  religious  belief. 

Moreover,  our  forefathers  knew  their  history.     They  were  not  so 
far  removed  in  time  from  the  bitter  experiences  of  the  religious  wars 


of  previous  centuries,  the  destruction  which  they  had  wrought  in  civil 
society,  the  wrongs  which  had  been  committed  under  them  in  the 
name  of  religion,  and  the  aftermath  of  hostility  that  had  embittered 
the  lives  and  relations  of  multitudes  of  men,  neighbors  to  one  another, 
subjects  or  citizens  of  the  same  government,  which  had  prevented 
them  from  achieving  national  unity,  culture,  and  general  civilization. 
Indeed,  phases  of  religious  persecution  in  the  early  history  of  our  own 
people  were  too  well  known  for  the  framers  of  the  constitution  to  run 
any  risk  of  breaking  down  their  new  civic  structure  under  the  weight 
of  religious  prejudice  and  persecution.  They  were  too  wise  to  lay 
foundations  for  possible  future  religious  conflicts. 

But  that  the  omission  of  any  mention  of  religion  or  of  God  in  our 
constitutions  implied  lack  of  religion  on  the  part  of  its  framers  or  on 
the  part  of  the  people  who  have  lived  under  these  constitutions,  is,  as 
we  all  know,  untrue.  Take  it  all  in  all,  there  is  no  more  religious 
people  on  the  face  of  the  earth  than  our  own.  While  there  is  some 
evidence  that  the  religious  spirit  has  been  weakened  in  recent  decades, 
that  sad  result  cannot  be  attributed  in  any  degree  to  our  constitution 
or  our  laws.  That  there  has  been  a  weakening  of  moral  fiber,  that 
there  is  some  laxity  of  conscience  in  matters  of  religion,  that  many 
things  formerly  regarded  as  holy  are  now  treated  lightly,  all  of  us,  I 
presume,  must  admit.  But  these  results  are  due  to  causes  that  have 
no  relation  to  our  political  constitution. 

Since  neither  the  federal  government  nor  the  governments  of  the 
states  include  the  regulation  of  religious  matters  within  their  pur- 
view, obviously  institutions  of  the  federal  government  or  of  the  states 
cannot  do  so  either.  Hence,  the  educational  systems  of  the  states 
make  no  provision  requiring  the  teaching  of  religion.  This  is  as  it 
should  be,  if,  as  we  commonly  think,  religion  is  a  matter  of  individual 
conscience,  a  matter  between  the  individual  and  his  God.  The  educa- 
tional systems  of  the  state,  including,  of  course,  the  state  university, 
cannot,  therefore,  undertake  to  train  young  men  and  young  women 
committed  to  their  charge  in  the  tenets  of  religious  doctrine.  Even 
if  it  were  politically  permissible,  it  would  be  actually  impracticable; 
for  the  only  way  in  which  it  could  be  done  would  be  to  make  provision 
for  the  teaching  of  religion  in  all  the  various  forms  represented  by 
different  religions  and  different  sects.  Unless  we  were  to  try  to  co- 
erce the  non-Christian  to  the  study  of  the  Christian  religion,  the  Catho- 
lic to  the  study  of  religion  as  Protestants  view  it,  or  the  Protestant 
to  the  study  of  religion  as  the  Catholic  views  it;  unless  we  were  to 
compel  the  Turk,  the  atheist,  the  Mohammedan,  the  Confucian  and 
the  Buddhist  to  adopt  and  observe  our  forms  of  religion,  it  would  be 
necessary  to  make  provision  for  the  recognition  and  teaching  of  all 
of  them,  possibly  in  the  same  educational  institution.  This,  as  I  said, 
would  be  impracticable. 

But  the  fact  that  express  provision  is  not  made  for  the  teaching 
Of  religion  in  the  public  schools,  including  the  state  university,  does 
not  imply  that  the  young  men  and  women  who  attend  the  university 


^ 


do  not  have  the  benefits  of  religious  instruction.  Still  less  does  it 
imply  that  the  importance  of  religious  instruction  as  part  of  the  neces- 
sary training  of  yguth  is  not  fully  recognized,  indeed  as  fully  recog- 
nized by  the  staffs  of  publicly  supported  institutions  as  by  those  of 
the  so-called   denominational  institutions. 

There  is  no  complete  education  without  religious  training.  The 
most  important  phase  of  education  is  the  development  of  character. 
Character  cannot  be  developed  in.  the  best  sense  without  belief  in, 
faith  in,  God.  }  For  I  do  not  agree  with  those  people  who,  under  the 
specious  presentation  of  alleged  scientific  facts  in  anthropology  and 
archeology,  allege  that  our  morals  are  wholly  the  result  of  habits  es- 
tablished by  the  influence  of  our  environment.  <f  I  believe  that  there 
is  in  the  hearts  of  men  a  primordial  instinctive  belief  in  a  Deity;  that 
that  belief  is  the  basis  of  standards  of  conduct;  that  those  standards 
of  conduct  determine  in  large  measure,  at  least,  the  relation  of  the 
individual  not  only  to  the  God  in  whom  he  believes,  but  to  his  fellow- 
men,  children  of  the  same  God.  (l  know  that  this  is  an  old-fashioned 
point  of  view.  I  know  that  many  enthusiastic  young  students  of  an- 
thropology, psychology  and  sociology,  think  they  have  found  in  the 
study  of  these  sciences  truths  that  will  enable  them  to  do  without  God 
because,  forsooth,  these  facts  may  be  used  in  such  a  way  as  to  explain 
away  some  particular  conception  of  the  Deity  which  they  may  have 
had.  Therefore,  some  of  them  tell  us  that  our  God,  your  God  and 
mine,  is  the  creation  of  our  imagination,  the  result  of  habits  adopted 
long  ago  by  our  forefathers  and  perpetuated  and  strengthened  through 
environment  and  the  hereditary  influences  of  succeeding  generations. 
They  undertake  to  explain  the  wonders  of  the  universe  as  merely  psy- 
chological or  physical  or  chemical  phenomena,  and,  therefore,  are  able 
to  separate  morals  and  standards  of  morals  from  the  idea  of  God.  I  do 
not  myself  so  believe.  It  is,  indeed,  possible  to  describe  God  and  the 
universe,  if  you  please,  in  the  terms  of  any  one  of  the  different 
sciences;  but  descriptions  of  that  kind  are  not  explanations  of  the 
causes  and,  therefore,  do  not  do  away  with  the  necessity  for  a  great 
original  cause.  Admitting  the  existence  of  a  great  original  cause,  we 
must  necessarily  admit,  it  seems  to  me,  that  our  conduct,  that  is,  our 
morals,  our  idea  of  duty  not  only  to  God  but  to  one  another,  must 
be  based  largely,  if  not  wholly,  upon  our  conceptions  of  what  God  is 
and  what  fie  requires  of  us.  \  From  my  point  of  view,  therefore,  morals 
depend  largely  upon  religion.  Since  education,  up  to  a  certain  point, 
at  any  rate,  is  primarily  the  development  of  character,  and  since 
character  is,  after  all,  the  training  in  moral  standards,  and  since  train- 
ing in  moral  standards  depends  upon  religious  belief,  it  follows  that 
religious  training  is  a  necessary  part  of  a  complete  education.  / 

The  religious  difficulties  of  college  boys  and  girls  usually  arise 
from  the  natural  tendency  to  laxity  that  comes  from  sudden  release 
from  parental  authority,  and  also,  in  part,  from  the  false  sense  of 
freedom  which  they  get  in  their  first  incursions  into  new  fields  of 
thought.  It  is  a  curious  phenomenon  of  human  nature  that  when  a 
new  field  of  inquiry  or  study  is  discovered  its  devotees  usually  seize 


upon  what  they  think  its  lessons  and  conclusions  to  undermine  old 
beliefs  and  standards.  Thus  to  many  the  establishment  of  some  of 
the  doctrines  of  modern  science  meant  the  abolition  of  faith  in  God. 
A  similar  tendency  has  been  observed  with  the  development  of  the 
more  recently  established  social  sciences.  The  tendency  here  has 
been  aggravated  because  the  subject  matter  of  these  sciences  is  one 
in  which  even  laymen  think  themselves  entitled  to  express  opinions. 
So  subjects  of  social  organization  and  reconstruction  which  can  be 
properly  understood  and  discussed  only  by  those  with  profound  knowl- 
edge of  the  subjects,  have  become  the  plaything  of  the  superficial 
writer  and  the  specious  thinker.  Not  a  little  of  the  breakdown  of  our 
moral  standards,  not  a  little  of  the  laxity  of  our  lives,  is  due,  in  my 
opinion,  to  the  fact  that  literary  writers,  before  whom  an  uncritical 
and  unthinking  public  bow  down,  have  assumed  the  role  of  social 
philosophers  and  prophets  of  social  progress,  attempting  to  explain 
the  life  and  purpose  of  society  without  knowing  much  about  it  and 
without  reasoning  as  iairly  and  logically  as  such  discussions  require. 
In  my  opinion,  much  of  the  moral  slime  that  has  smirched  the  thought 
of  the  people,  young  and  old,  in  the  past  twenty  years  has  come  from 
the  literature  of  the  day  and  not  from  the  teaching  of  the  colleges.1 
To  be  sure,  some  professional  social  scientists  are  equally  guilty.  It 
is  no  wonder  that  young  people  have  been,  led  astray  by  the  light  of 
supposed  authority.  If  your  teachers  in  the  Wesley  Foundation  are 
to  do  much  good,  they  must  command  respect  as  authorities  in  their 
subjects,  as  well  as  for  the  profundity  and  tenacity  of  their  religious 
faith. 

Since  a  state  university  cannot,  under  the  constitution  and  the 
laws,  provide  the  religious  training  necessary  to  a  complete  and  well 
rounded  education,  it  must  be  provided  in  some  other  way.  In  the 
past  the  churches  in  the  locality  where  a  university  existed,  members 
of  the  faculty  of  the  university  and  other  citizens  of  the  locality  inter- 
ested in  such  matters  have  always  interested  themselves  in  providing 
opportunities  for  religious  study  to  the  students  of  the  universities. 
This  method  was  feasible  when  the  numbers  of  students  were  small; 
but  after  all,  local  churches  had  their  own  constituents  and  the  atten- 
tion which  pastors  and  members  of  these  churches  could  give  to  addi- 
tional attendants  or  adherents  from  the  university*  in  the  neighbor- 
hood was  meager  and  certainly  not  adequate  to  promote  the  best  re- 
ligious welfare  of  the  young  people  themselves.  It  was  evident  long 
ago  that  some  special  measures  would  be  necessary  to  meet  the  situ- 
ation. Thirty  years  ago  or  more  I  heard  the  subject  discussed  and 
the  proposal  made  that  the  various  denominations  establish  their  own 
institutions  or  institutes  in  localities  where  state  universities  existed 
to  give  special  attention  to  the  young  men  and  young  women  away 
from  home  who  were  members  of  their  denominations.  It  was  some- 
times difficult,  to  be  sure,  to  convince  local  pastors  and  sometimes  the 
officers  of  the  denominations  that  special  provision  was  necessary  or 
that  a  special  need  existed.  Too  many  of  them  were  content  to  regard 
their  duty  as  done  by  acclaiming  the  alleged  Godlessness  of  the  insti- 


t 


tutions  and  urging  the  adherents  of  their  denominations  to  go  else- 
where. But  the  adherents  of  these  denominations  did  not  ohey.  In 
increasing  numbers  they  flocked  to  the  state  universities  where  better 
provisions  for  scientific,  literary,  and  other  training  were  provided. 
So  it  happens  that  in  the  fall  of  this  year  the  University  of  Illinois  had 
among  its  students  1451  members  of  the  Methodist  Church  and  359 
non-members  but  adherents;  898  members  of  the  Presbyterian  Church 
and  218  adherents;  455  members  of  the  Catholic  Church  and  22  adher- 
ents; 409  members  of  the  Christian  Church  and  105  adherents;  329 
members  of  the  Congregational  Church  and  116  adherents;  325  mem- 
bers of  the  Baptist  Church  and  74  adherents;  273  members  of  the  Epis- 
copal Church  and  41  adherents;  257  members  of  the  Lutheran  Church 
and  45  adherents.  Thus  it  happened,  too,  that  the  University  had 
three  people  of  the  Mohammedan  faith,  five  of  the  Hindu  faith,  and 
representatives  of  the  Buddhist,  the  Mormon  and  other  churches  and 
denominations.  In  short,  there  were  at  the  University  in  all  4,700 
young  people  who  avowed  themselves  members  of  their  various 
churches  and  2,800  more  who  proclaimed  themselves  adherents.  Surely 
he  would  be  a  rash  man  who  would  say  that  the  responsibility  of 
taking  care  of  this  great  number  of  young  people  avowing  a  religious 
life  should  be  cast  upon  the  local  churches  and  their  pastors,  prepared 
as  they  are  to  take  care  of  ordinary  congregations.  Hence  the  logic 
of  the  situation,  has  forced  the  recognition  of  the  fact  that  special 
provision  should  be  made.  Such  special  provision  has  been  made  in 
various  ways  with  more  or  less  success  at  different  universities  at 
various  times  in  the  past  twenty  years.  One  of  the  most  notable  pro- 
visions and  one  which  is  undoubtedly  most  full  of  promise  is  the  one. 
for  the  dedication  of  which  we  are  gathered  here  today. 

The  principle  on  which  this  new  organization,  the  Wesley  Foun- 
dation, is  established  is  that  the  people  of  the  Methodist  Church  shall 
make  adequate  provision  for  the  religious  training  and  social  life  of 
the  young  people  of  the  University  of  Illinois  who  profess  themselves 
as  members  or  adherents  of  that  church.  It  is  intended  to  give  here 
such  courses  of  instruction  of  collegiate  and  university  grade  as  are 
necessary  to  carry  out  the  purposes  of  the  Foundation.  Some  of  these 
will  undoubtedly  be  of  a  sufficiently  literary,  scientific,  or  cultural 
character  to  deserve  recognition  towards  a  University  degree,  and  ar- 
rangements looking  in  that  direction  have  already  been  made.  These 
arrangements  will  simply  mean  that  students  who  take  certain  courses 
given  by  the  staff  of  the  Foundation  may,  under  proper  conditions,  get 
credit  for  them  towards  their  University  degree,  precisely  as  if  they 
had  transferred  from  colleges  in  some  other  part  of  the  State.  From 
this  point  of  view  and  for  this  purpose  the  Wesley  Foundation,  and 
all  others  like  it,  are  regularly  chartered  educational  institutions  and 
will  receive  the  same  treatment  as  any  regularly  chartered  educational 
institution  in  the  matter  of  transfer  of  credits.  It  is  to  be  hoped  that 
at  an  early  date  the  people  of  the.  other  chuches  or  denominations  will 
follow  the  splendid  example  which  the  Methodists  of  the  State  and 
country  have  set  by  the  erection  of  this  noble  building  and  the  estab- 


lishment  of  this  great  Foundation.  It  is  my  hope,  too,  that  the  Wes- 
ley Foundation  may  grow  into  a  sphere  of  usefulness  far  beyond  that 
contemplated  by  those  who  first  had  the  vision  or  those  who  have 
brought  it  to  its  present  consummation.  It  is  my  hope  and  prayer, 
as  I  know  it  is  the  hope  and  prayer  of  all  the  members  of  the  faculty 
of  the  University,  that  these  young  people  will  be  refreshed  and 
strengthened  in  their  faith  by  the  things  that  they  will  study  and 
hear  in  this  noble  building;  and  that  the  inspiration  of  their  religious 
teachers  here  and  the  refreshment  which  they  will  gain  from  social 
life  here  will  not  only  strengthen  them  for  finer  and  better  work  in 
the  studies  of  the  University  curriculum,  but  will  supplement  those 
studies  and  in  conjunction  with  them  will  round  out  the  characters 
and  lives  of  the  young  people  who  in  the  coming  years  will  throng 
this  hall. 

I  am  sure  that  I  can  speak  not  only  for  myself  but  for  the  faculty 
of  the  University  in  offering  you  heartiest  congratulations  on  the  suc- 
cessful accomplishment  of  this  great  dream.  I  pay  my  tribute  of  re- 
spect and  admiration  to  the  man  who  first  dreamed  that  dream,  to  the 
men  who  caught  his  inspiration  and  carried  it  to  a  realization,  to  the 
man  who  through  the  last  fourteen  years,  amid  discouragements  which 
you  and  I  will  never  know,  at  last  is  able  to  look  upon  the  physical 
realization  of  his  great  vision.  Terah  died  in  Haran,  far  away  from 
his  goal.  Moses  was  taken  to  the  mountain  top  and  shown  the  land 
he  was  never  to  enter.  Multitudes  of  men  in  all  spheres  and  walks 
of  life  have  dreamed  dreams  they  have  never  realized  and  projected 
plans  they  have  never  been  able  to  complete.  Dr.  Baker  is  more  fortu- 
nate. He  has  not  only  dreamed  the  dream  and  seen  the  vision  and 
projected  the  plan,  but  he  remains  among  us  to  put  it  into  operation, 
to  see  the  results  of  its  operation,  to  watch  its  influence,  to  determine 
the  measure  of  its  success,  and  to  devise  projects  for  making  even 
better  that  which  he  has  brought  to  so  successful  and  splendid  a  con- 
clusion. May  he  long  remain  among  us  carrying  on  the  great  work  to 
which  under  God  he  has  committed  himself  in  these  past  fourteen  years. 
We,  in  this  community  and  in  this  University,  would  not  be  what  we 
are  if  we  had  not  had  in,  our  midst  Dr.  Baker  and  other  men 
consecrated  as  he  is  to  the  service  of  God  in  the  improvement  of  the 
life  of  our  young  people  in  the  University.  I  thank  God  that  the  Meth- 
odists of  Illinois  have  done  this  thing.  In  doing  it  they  have  served 
God  in  a  larger  measure  and  in,  more  ramified  ways  than  they  yet  real- 
ize. It  will  be  a  generation  before  they  will  be  able  to  understand, 
still  less  to  appreciate,  anything  like  the  full  measure  of  the  good  that 
the  institution  of  the  Wesley  Foundation  will  do  for  the  Methodist 
students  of  the  University  of  Illinois.  I  pray  God  that  it  will  not  be 
long  before   similar  Foundations  are  erected  by  the  other  churches. 


c*>= 
oi 

—A." 

roi 

o= 

01= 
01= 
01= 
10= 
10= 

01= 


